Today's Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

Forums › Off topic › Today's Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

1 | ... | 253 | 254 | 255 | 256 | 257 | 258 | 259 | 260 | 261 | 262 | 263 | ... | 301

3577 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2939

#3364266 15-Apr-2025 12:10

kingdragonfly:

Just dealing with biology, and being a male, I'm not an expert. I'm also steering away from gender identity. I'm talking about biology only here folks, not politics.

But all "pregnant people" ≠ "women"

OTOH 'pregnant people' = 'pregnant women'.

I believe everybody should live their best lives and be treated decently - but the dancing round the issue does lead to some silly situations.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

SomeoneSomewhere

1882 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1086

Lifetime subscriber

#3364269 15-Apr-2025 12:19

Aaand that's why this is probably politics section material.

I'm pretty sure at least some intersex people can and do get pregnant. And yes, people can get their identity documents changed such that they are now legally women.

Edit: and yeah, 'pregnant people' is already a sufficiently narrow class; narrowing it to 'pregnant women' adds no useful information other than excluding people who you want to include in the class.

'People who can get pregnant' and various other ways of saying 'biologically typical female' is a bit clunky... but this isn't even that.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3364270 15-Apr-2025 12:22

elpenguino:

OTOH 'pregnant people' = 'pregnant women'.

I believe everybody should live their best lives and be treated decently - but the dancing round the issue does lead to some silly situations.

Are we treating 11 year old girls as women now ?

Are those that can NOT get pregnant less of a woman ?

What the heck is wrong with using "People" ?

What's next, those who adopt are not REAL parents (irrespective of the gender identity).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#3364275 15-Apr-2025 12:51

Actually, I have read some papers that maintain it is entirely possible for males to be impregnated and carry foetuses to term. A womb is not strictly necessary (ectopic pregnancy) and a fertilised egg would have to be artificially implanted and the baby delivered by Caesarian but it is not entirely inconceivable and will no doubt happen one day, in spite of the huge risks and overwhelming moral objections. While it is more than likely that both 'mother' and baby would die, it cannot entirely be ruled out.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

ezbee

2657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3099

#3364296 15-Apr-2025 13:45

Our rapid descent to sounding like grammar complaints to BBC for not using proper English.
This deserves a post here of its own. :-)

Edit missed this ode to people.

Mi-Sex - People (1980)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_j3PxSmoaU

Tinkerisk

4800 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3660

#3364304 15-Apr-2025 13:55

ezbee:

Our rapid descent to sounding like grammar complaints to BBC for not using proper English.
This deserves a post here of its own. :-)

Not only that. Pleonasms such as ‘new innovations’ and ‘newly renovated’ are used here in public broadcasting without blushing.

O tempora, o mores.

Qui nihil scit, omnia credere debet.
Firewalls do NOT stop dragons.
In effect we have everything to hide from someone, and no idea who someone is.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

johno1234

3357 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2843

#3364348 15-Apr-2025 17:04

Rikkitic:

Actually, I have read some papers that maintain it is entirely possible for males to be impregnated and carry foetuses to term. A womb is not strictly necessary (ectopic pregnancy) and a fertilised egg would have to be artificially implanted and the baby delivered by Caesarian but it is not entirely inconceivable and will no doubt happen one day, in spite of the huge risks and overwhelming moral objections. While it is more than likely that both 'mother' and baby would die, it cannot entirely be ruled out.

I don't believe this for one minute. An ectopic pregnancy is not survivable for the embryo although the mother may survive. A biological male cannot sustain a pregnancy for any time let alone to term as the womb provides a complex protective and supporting structure without which no embryo could possibly survive.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#3364356 15-Apr-2025 17:39

Not claiming any expertise. Just reporting what I read. I wish I had the paper but it was a long time ago.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
9334 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6203

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3364370 15-Apr-2025 18:33

Rikkitic:

Actually, I have read some papers that maintain it is entirely possible for males to be impregnated and carry foetuses to term. A womb is not strictly necessary (ectopic pregnancy) and a fertilised egg would have to be artificially implanted and the baby delivered by Caesarian but it is not entirely inconceivable and will no doubt happen one day, in spite of the huge risks and overwhelming moral objections. While it is more than likely that both 'mother' and baby would die, it cannot entirely be ruled out.

IANAMed and I’ve seen your subsequent post but without a credible citation this has to be unbelievable. The critical words are ‘to term’ - an ectopic pregnancy may be possible - but ‘to term’? Hmm.

I guess the zygote provides its own placenta - but surely the womb plays a big part too - physical protection if nothing else. No womb? Hmm again.

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
9334 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6203

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3364380 15-Apr-2025 19:08

As is my wont, I posted first then consulted the interwebs second. I asked ChatGPT (yes, I know) “Could a human male start an ectopic pregnancy?”

As expected there was a fairly long answer (which I won’t paste here) but it concluded with:

“In Summary:

An ectopic pregnancy in a human male is biologically impossible. It would require advanced, speculative medical procedures that currently don’t exist for male bodies — and would still pose life-threatening risks.”

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#3364381 15-Apr-2025 19:08

I am not invested in this but because it has provoked such strong reactions I decided to look into it a bit. I found a few accounts with references. I don't know if they are credible or not but I'm sure others could find out more if they really wanted to. If these accounts are correct it does seem in rare cases of abdominal ectopic pregnancies that babies have been successfully brought to term. This is in women, of course, not men. Make of it what you will.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
9334 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6203

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3364382 15-Apr-2025 19:17

Rikkitic:

I am not invested in this but because it has provoked such strong reactions I decided to look into it a bit. I found a few accounts with references. I don't know if they are credible or not but I'm sure others could find out more if they really wanted to. If these accounts are correct it does seem in rare cases of abdominal ectopic pregnancies that babies have been successfully brought to term. This is in women, of course, not men. Make of it what you will.

Understand where you’re coming from now but the point of your initial post was ‘male - to term’. AFAIAA female ectopic pregnancies to term are extremely uncommon but well-documented.

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#3364443 15-Apr-2025 20:55

My initial post suggested it was theoretically possible, which is what I remember taking away from the document I read. Then it was suggested here (if I have it right) that ectopic pregnancy could never result in live birth. I checked and that seems not to be entirely correct. That is what I was responding to.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

kingdragonfly

11992 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12887

Subscriber

#3364459 15-Apr-2025 21:39

From what I've heard briefly, gaming consoles, like the new Nintendo Switch and the PS5 are NOT exempted from Trump's tariffs.

In New Zealand PS5 consoles and their accessories are duty-free, meaning no import tariff is applied.

Since even the new Sony price (including shipping and insurance) is just a tiny bit below thr NZ$1,000 threshold, Customs typically does not collect GST or other fees.

So why are we getting punished for US tariffs, but the US isn't (yet)?

Is Sony robbing Peter to pay Paul, (robbing New Zealand to pay the US.)

Sony Announces PS5 Price Hikes in UK, Europe, Australia and New Zealand—Is the US Next?: International Business Times

Gamers worldwide will be feeling the pinch as Sony reveals price increases for the PlayStation 5 in key markets. The news has sparked concern, especially in the US, where players are now wondering if they'll be next to face a steeper cost for their console.

Sony announced that the price tag on certain PlayStation 5 systems will be higher in the UK and other nations, attributing it to a 'challenging economic environment.' The company revealed that starting 14 April, the PS5 Digital Edition—the console without a disc drive—will see a price jump
...

SomeoneSomewhere

1882 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1086

Lifetime subscriber

#3364508 15-Apr-2025 21:49

kingdragonfly:

Since even the new Sony price (including shipping and insurance) is just a tiny bit below thr NZ$1,000 threshold, Customs typically does not collect GST or other fees.

That isn't exactly accurate. The $1000 threshold only applies where both:

The entire shipment is <$1000 - customs even looks out for 'structuring' like having 5x $900 shipments turn up in a day
The sender does not send large volumes to NZ ($1M/year, IIRC) - this fixed the 'amazon loophole' so now things bought from amazon/ebay/aliexpress get charged GST at source.
It's a direct-to-consumer sale with no NZ broker.

Imports to an NZ business don't charge GST; the NZ business charges the GST when they sell the product.

A container full of PS5s or any other product is going to be treated as a single 'shipment'. Customs is going to check it's going to a retailer or importer who will charge GST as necessary.

There would be no difference whether this was $900 or $1100 product.

1 | ... | 253 | 254 | 255 | 256 | 257 | 258 | 259 | 260 | 261 | 262 | 263 | ... | 301